Literature DB >> 19087497

[A prospective study on nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy in patients with cervical cancer].

Bin Li1, Rong Zhang, Ling-Ying Wu, Gong-Yi Zhang, Xian Li, Gao-Zhi Yu.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy (NSRH) technique and its impact on postoperative voiding function.
METHODS: Forty-four patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage I b1-IIa cervical cancer were enrolled and randomized into NSRH group (study group, n = 22) and conventional radical hysterectomy (CRH) group (control group, n = 22). The pelvic autonomic nerve pathway (including hypogastric nerve, pelvic splanchnic nerve, inferior hypogastric plexus and bladder branch) was completely preserved in the NSRH group. Related parameters were compared between the two groups.
RESULTS: The estimated blood loss in NSRH group and CRH group were (550 +/- 241) ml and (475 +/- 284) ml, respectively, with no significant difference (P > 0.05). The mean operation time in NSRH group and CRH group were (329 +/- 43) min and (272 +/- 56) min, respectively, with a significant difference (P < 0.01). More patients in NSRH group had post-void residual urine volume (PVR) < 100 ml than that in CRH group on day 8 after surgery (68% vs. 18%, P < 0.01). The median duration of postoperative catheterization was significantly shorter in NRSH group (8 - 23 days, median 8 days) than that in CRH group (8 - 32 days, median 20 days; P < 0.01). Neither surgery-related injury nor pathologically positive margin was reported in either of the groups.
CONCLUSIONS: NSRH is a feasible and safe technique for preserving bladder function. Larger prospective studies are needed to confirm the efficacy of this technique.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 19087497

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi        ISSN: 0529-567X


  3 in total

Review 1.  Lower urinary tract dysfunction after nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy.

Authors:  Fouad Aoun; Roland van Velthoven
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2014-11-29       Impact factor: 2.894

2.  Conventional versus nerve-sparing radical surgery for cervical cancer: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Hee Seung Kim; Keewon Kim; Seung Bum Ryoo; Joung Hwa Seo; Sang Youn Kim; Ji Won Park; Min A Kim; Kyoung Sup Hong; Chang Wook Jeong; Yong Sang Song
Journal:  J Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 4.401

Review 3.  Clinical efficacy and safety of nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ying Long; De-Sheng Yao; Xin-Wei Pan; Ting-Yu Ou
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-04-18       Impact factor: 3.240

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.